Seanad debates

Wednesday, 20 January 2010

6:00 pm

Photo of Donie CassidyDonie Cassidy (Fianna Fail)

No more than his good self who will come up against these matters from time to time, I appreciate that.

Much work has been done by the leaders, the representatives who have sat down with the Minister and tried to get a consensus on how we can make the Seanad more meaningful. As far as I am concerned, the suggestions that have been made here by various colleagues for the Seanad are all worthwhile and most of them are worthy of being included in Seanad reform.

The suggestion that we should sit here at least one day a week on the sixth stage of legislation on European directives and assisting the nation and the Ministers when they go to Europe is good, and we fully support it. That was one of the proposals we, in Fianna Fáil, included for the Minister's consideration.

I am here as long as anybody with the exception of one Member. The value of the Seanad is there is no guillotine on legislation. The value of the Seanad was seen on the NAMA legislation and the various legislation on banking that came before us recently where every section was debated and discussed in minute detail, section by section and line by line. That is the difference between Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann. Dáil Éireann does not and cannot say that every section and every line is debated and discussed because we know that is not a fact. The guillotine is used there because the considerable membership in the Dáil does not allow time. It would be sitting seven days a week if that was the case. The strength of the Seanad is that there is no guillotine used. Certainly under my leadership since 1997, no guillotine has ever been used. We have sat until 4 o'clock and 5 o'clock in the morning, and even 8.20 a.m. on the NAMA legislation.

The taxpayer and democracy are well protected. Every section of value for money legislation proposed by any Minister or Government is discussed in minute detail.

Let us consider the workload of the Seanad. Last year, we sat for 100 days. Never in its history has Seanad Éireann sat for 100 days. Last year, Dáil Éireann sat for 101 days. These were unprecedented sittings and we are very proud of that fact. In 2008, the House accepted 1,201 amendments to legislation from Ministers who appeared before the House, a very significant contribution to legislation and to ensuring better, stronger and more relevant Bills. In 2008, 31% of all legislation was initiated in the Seanad. Certain colleagues in the House may remember the 1980s when it would have been a celebration if two Bills per year were initiated in the House. The substantial amount of legislation now being initiated in the House speaks volumes and indicates the esteem in which the Cabinet holds the Seanad and the importance of the House in helping and assisting the Government to process more legislation. This is very welcome.

The Fianna Fáil proposal on Seanad Éireann suggests a right of audience for Northern Ireland Assembly Members. It provides for a right of audience in the House for up to ten Members who may come down here on occasion, perhaps once or twice per year, and be present for debates to be agreed by the Chairs of both Houses. In return, Members of Seanad Éireann would have a right of audience in the Northern Ireland Assembly to see how we could assist in the great work of the Good Friday Agreement, the North South bodies, the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly and all the important committees and functions carried out by the Council of Ministers in respect of Northern Ireland.

We also support the automatic return of the Cathaoirleach as one of the Taoiseach's 11 appointments. The Cathaoirleach is in a very difficult position because he must stay completely independent and cannot attend any function. This makes it almost impossible or very difficult at least for his re-election, which is unfair. We suggested the same mechanism as that used in the Dáil at present. In the short-term at least, the Cathaoirleach should be automatically returned as one of the Taoiseach's 11 appointments.

I refer to the case of the Leader of the House as well - the position not the person - and the proposal in the 2004 report of my predecessor and the work of the associated committee. They worked so hard and proposed in the 2004 report that the Leader of the House should have a right of audience at Cabinet to keep the Seanad centre stage, given its importance, and to have it properly briefed every week. There are many good ideas to enhance the role of the Seanad.

My background was in the world of marketing before I came to the Seanad. The greatest problem is to let the good people of Ireland, our constituents, know what is taking place in Seanad Éireann. This is why we are working so hard and striving to have at least one hour of the Order of Business live on television, say on a Thursday morning. It is my wish and hope that by Easter all the difficulties and problems will be out of the way such that this could take place.

This House did not get its name as the Upper House from a one-liner in a newspaper, magazine or television show. It earned the right because of the level of debate. Colleagues on all sides of the House and our predecessors can take kudos from the fact that often people who visit the Houses remark to me that the level of debate in the Seanad is extraordinarily high and I thank them for their comments. If the people could see the House live on television they could make up their minds without reference to anyone's point of view. I have no wish to repeat what other colleagues have said but I welcome the proposal of the Senators who have tabled this matter for debate this evening and I look forward to the Minister reverting to the House with real, meaningful proposals. We fully support the awarding of votes to all graduates on the university panels and I recognise our university colleagues are fully supportive of this as well.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.